61 comments:

In your headline, you claim that SF supporters incited the violence. Are you able to back this up with your personal eyewitness statement or is this based on hearsay?

I was personally at the protest held in Colombo (as an observer and photographer) and saw what transpired.

The violence was incited by a group of people carrying pictures of MR. They were armed with bottles and iron rods. This group commenced to throw large stones at the protesters and this is what initiated the violence.

Please do not spread false rumours to justify your opinion. Liberty and freedom of expression were abused by the police and supporters of MR.

"i think the primary responsibility for violence should be with the protesters"

So in your personal opinion, the protesters should have remained calm and done nothing when they were being assaulted with stones by a group of thugs?

"but why should they throw stones at police vehicles and damage them?"

The damage was caused to the police vehicles because the group of thugs were using the said vehicles for protection.

"there is some reports of an unkwon group throwing stones."

They may be unknown as you claim, but they were definitely carrying placards in support of MR and throwing stones at the protesters. This IMHO puts them on whatever side was against this protest taking place.

"all those facts are in public media. "

The photographs of the stone throwing, armed group is also in the public media, so why then do you seem to still cling to the belief that the protesters are the ones to blame?

As i said before, individuals' rights to protest peacefully were trampled under yesterday.

Its a fact that JVP/UNPers came to "protest" with the intention of causing violence then like their leaders pass the blame onto someone else.

JVP by far the experts at this, experts at violence.

They came and attacked public and private property as well as many innocents hoping to get a Police response and when they did they cried foul.

This unruly mob came with the plan of causing mayhem. Trying an "Iran" in SL.

They could not care less about Fonseka, same lot wanted the Army to be wiped out, the LTTE to win and Fonseka to be executed in one of the Wests kangaroo courts. When the Government accused Fonseka of coup, corruption (HiCorp) they demanded, “if he is guilty arrested him”, now that happened they cry foul.

The same people (UNP, JVP, LTTE/TNA, West, Colombians) championing him are merely using him as a rallying tool to attack the Government with primarily to split the Sinhalese and give us another “conflict” and to act as chief witness to push their bogus “war crimes” agenda to punish Sri Lanka for the “crime” of destroying the LTTE, the “crime” of stopping suicide bombings, ethnic cleansings, abductions, slaughters, economic uncertainty and instability in the country and for defying them so bluntly. Fonseka whether he willingly or not became a tool of greedy losers (Sri Lanka’s peusdo-elite) and outside racists and interferers who want to see the greedy losers in power and the country forever divided and held to ransom by the LTTE.

There is even a facebook group being launched by the same people who wanted Fonseka jailed for “war crimes” now demanding he be “freed”.

anon @ 2/11/2010 12:32 pmsays"So we shouldn't protest at all right? Good. ""We should just shut up and wait right? Yeah sounds like everything we did so far"

this is what i said in post"if his supporters and defendants think that action should be protested they are free to do so, peacefully. they are also free to file a fundamental rights petition "

clearly this anon is irrational and has reading problem.lol-

pol sambol:

thanks for the commenti athink lot of what you say in that comment is true and probable

-

anon 2/11/2010 12:37 pm

thanks for sharing the link .ranil is shameless and it is clear who he serves .

-anon @ 2/11/2010 12:42 pmhow can you say they are not part of sf protest ?

anyway we know for certain that sf protesters attacked police and private property and unlawfully broke down the barrier put up to protect courts .that is not misinformationthat is unacceptable violence .

-anon 2/11/2010 1:02 pm

"...you too are going on hearsay that there was no physical abuse...."well it is hearsay that there was physical abuse. and i am not the one holding protests bc of hearsay

and the claim of about lack of access was false .-

"these claims (true or false) were NOT what initiated the violence"when you work on ppl's emotions by claiming physical abuse (which even you admit is hearsay at best), and parading his wife teary eyed with false claims that is clearly preparing for an emotional and violent response from his supporters.

"It was the actions of a group of people throwing stones at the protesters that did this...protesters were attacked by this group?"that is your version of sequence of events .again why should sf supporters then attack police vehicles? that does not make sense and is unacceptable

"In the end, individuals' rights to liberty and free expression were trampled upon by either the GOSL or other parties with vested interests who wanted this protest stopped."in fact if we go by the facts.far from protest being stopped , a violent protest was held by sf supporters and they damaged public and private property and broke laws. that is not acceptable . gov should not tolerate such violence .

he says he will not visit here naymore. lolwhy?bc i say stick to facts ?bc i denounce violence like that of protesters who damaged public and private property and broke laws ?bc i don't censor his comments ?bc i use reason to refute absurd arguments and lies at 'length'?

that after all is all i did here

typical of such ppl to run from all that and close their eyes.

of course it is their free choice to remain in a cocoon fantasy removed from reality and where reason has no place . just don't use violence .

i and this blog gets things right ( defeating terrorists, election etc etc) in most cases bc i stick to reality and reason . many others get things wrong bc they don't out of their own free will.

I was just reading Electra's blog and I saw the comments that you left. I may not always agree with what electra says but I dont feel the need to get abusive- unlike you.I think you need to get some manners, everyone has the right to express their opinions and it seems like you take electra's posts very personally.

anon @ 2/11/2010 2:45 pmno i am just sticking to facts and reason and condemning violence .is that stupid? lol

typical and stupid of ppl who don't do any of that to leave comments like yours here.

anon @ 2/11/2010 3:24 pm if you find my comments at electra's blog objectionable you should make your objections there, and not cover your inability to deal with fact and reason about the subject of this post, by making irrelevant reference to it here

for the record, i do not make false accusations anywhere, including in electra's blog . care to point any lie i told?

and if i use certain words in some blog , i do so bc they are completely true, and similar to (unjustified) words used against me in the same blog.

btw with regard electra's blog if anything i have not used all i know about her connections and activities bc she has not disclosed her identity there though it is widely known. i have stuck to what she has disclosed there . unlike her attacking me using whole blog posts, i have not devoted even comments to attacking her here.

Whether government reaction was legit or not (I think it is legit) I think the whole scene was unnecessary. The dirty alliance was very efficiently digging their own grave and leading the sheep to a dead end with vote rigging joke. Even SF vote protests would have died out of boredom. Government gave them some adrenalin.

politically you are right that unholy alliance was digging it grave and sf arrest is a arrest of sf helps them temporarily

however as i wrote in your blog and elsewhere . this is not just political tactics. i think he was really undermining democracy and guilty of crimes i wrote in previous post . it would be dangerous to sri lanka to let that continue.

how was i caught with my 'pants down'?nothing there contradict what i say here . do point that out . if you can. fool

-anon 2/12/2010 10:45 AM

are you the same as above ?as i explain before ( read mr fool before repeating already refuted absurd arguments )>

i gave why i think sf supporters incited violence in post .

"they used false accounts of sarath fonseka's arrest with allegations of physical abuse, parading his teary wife in front of cameras (to allege more falsehoods about lack of access to him), etc."

>how does the link contradict that?lol

and how did police got attacked ? isn't that sf protesters? is that violence acceptable to you ?

how was i in the wrong again? do explain if you can mr fool.lol

may be before you repeat your silly irrational argument here again get your head examined .

to repeat bc the anon fool is ignoring facts in fact if we go by the facts.far from protest being stopped , a violent protest was held by sf supporters and they damaged public and private property and broke laws. that is not acceptable . gov should not tolerate such violence . all that is still true. nothing ( certainly not the link that anons repeat post ) has contradicted any of that.

read what i wrote did i say 'they incited violence just by protesting' ? no

this is what i wrote "they used false accounts of sarath fonseka's arrest with allegations of physical abuse, parading his teary wife in front of cameras (to allege more falsehoods about lack of access to him), etc. to drive his supporters to a violent frenzy."

I'm not asking you whether you have evidence to prove that these allegations are true. I'm asking what evidence do you have to claim that they are false. What evidence do you have to prove that Hakeem and Handunetti and Mano and Somawansha are lying... Also what do you think about the fact that the camera and the reels of the AFP reporter was confiscated. (I'm Lefroy by the way. Thanks for publishing the above comment of mine. And this one too if do)

Sittingnut. It is you who made the claim that the allegations are false. It is up to you to prove it... On the other hand I have evidence to prove that Fonseka was physically abused and was humiliated. I have four eye-witnesses. Eye-witnesses count for something, at least in civilian courts. They could be false evidence. But they are still evidence. What do you have to prove these allegations are false?... Also you haven't said a word about the AFP reporter. It favours me. What do you say? Why did the Army confiscate his camera and reels if things didn't get ugly?

as i said some ppl are unable grasp logic. there is no cure for idiocy like above commenter's

-if there is no evidence and claim amount to denigration of others it is slander .

before calling such claims slander, there is no need to prove anything, beyond pointing out that there is no evidence.

and to repeat there is no independently verifiable evidence of physical abuse.

-as for so called eye witness accounts, has there been any "in civilian courts" on this? nolol

several sf supporting politicians and their propagandists aka professional liars make inconsistent claims ( who then also use that claim and other falsehoods to incite violence ) .

military have categorically denied any physical abuse of sf. they are subject to law when carrying out their job of arresting and can be challenged in court if they abused their powers. no such challenge about physical abuse has been made ) (fool who made above comment of course has missed that denial it seems. typical)

so as far as eye witnesses go there is conflicting claims . ( btw who would any rational person give more weight to , professional liars or military professionals? lol)

from above comment it is clear that above fool only has ears for professional liarslol-

btw what is the name of afp reporter ?has he/she made a legal complaint about 'confiscation')? if not why not ?bc it was legal? (eg to prevent anyone photographing a legal arrest ?) or did it never happen?and did he/she say there was physical abuse ? and they were captured on images?

if anyone know all these details for certain there will be a point in talking about afp reporter .

as it is only fools like above commenter may want to talk about him/her .

are you going to support another violent murderous family taking over?

I guess you didn't sit on the fence like your best friend Indi and sometimes support one and then the other.

However, I wonder what sort of turncoat you would have been if Fonseka had een a clear winner with less spin and more substance.

I mean what kind of mass murderer thinks that he is going to win an election based on forcibly getting the vote of Tamil people that he has mass murdered?

At least Rajapakse is cluey enough to know that he will eventually get the full brunt of Tamil vengence. And hey, Tamil's a vengeful. They're mostly Hindus, they like the Sinhalese believe in an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth.

You just have to wonder in what form it will take, in fact is what is happening to Sri Lanka right now a form of Tamil vengance?

Or is it your just deserts and karma?

Either way, you along with all the middle class Sinhalese apologists for perpetually voting in arseholes are becoming known for your true colours.

Neo-nazis who would put Hitler to shame. The Sinhalese will never be a race that no-one blames. Instead you will become the pariah's of the 21st Century and I'd say it's too late for you to change that.

Too many people know too much about what genocidal maniacs you are.

So squabble amongst yourselves, kill each other, bash each other up ... it's what you know best.

If you make a statement, you should back it up with facts and evidence... If you say these allegations are doubtful, it's alright. You can say they don't have anything apart from 4 eye-witnesses. But if you say those allegations are false, you should prove that they are false with facts and evidence. So what I'm doing isn't slander. I have four people who were there at the time... No one has been 'in a civilian court' because it's the Army that is accused. You want Hakeem to sue the Army in a civilian court? And for what should they sue? For the fact that Fonseka was physically abused?... Anyway that is not the point. Read carefully what wrote. What I wrote was that eye-witnesses count for something in a civilian court. That means, eye-witnesses are valid as evidence in a civilian court. I have eye-witnesses. You have none... I don't know the name of the AFP reporter. But with the cameras and memory chips (not the reels it turns out) of a AFP reporter and a Daily Mirror reporter were confiscated. To whom do you want them to complain? Do you want them to complain to the police that the Army confiscated their stuff. I don't know whether they did. But I doubt.

he says,"If you make a statement, you should back it up with facts and evidence"

exactly !no evidence for physical abuse .and if the unsubstantiated statement is denigrating to others (as this is ) it is slander .

no need to prove anything else to call it slander.

the fool above who repeatedly comments here cannot get his tiny buttbrain to understand this fact it seems.

lol-

fool continues to ignore the fact that military has categorically denied any physical abuse . iow there is a conflict in so called eye witness accounts ( none of which are sworn testimony ) . eye witnesses he 'has' ( in his pocket ? lol) give inconsistent accounts and are known sf supporting professional liars, politicians and propagandists.

( btw who would any rational person give more weight to , professional liars or military professionals? lol)

from above comments it is clear that above fool only has ears for professional liarslol

-fool does not know much (anything?)about afp reporter.

but fool claims that , what he relates us to about an incident about afp reporter (even basic facts of which he does not know) to be some sort of corroborating evidence for physical abuse!

lol how absurd is that?as i said above commenter is plain crazy .

even if incident with afp reporter happened as he says ( far from certain it did since no details are there not even the name ) it may be a routine legal thing and has no relation to any physical abuse.

if anyone wants to bring afp reporter in to this in rational manner, answer the following

what is the name of afp reporter ?has he/she made a legal complaint about 'confiscation')? (if not why not ?bc it was legal? (eg to prevent anyone photographing a legal arrest ?)or did it never happen?and did he/she say there was physical abuse ? and they were captured on images?

without even basic details like that afp reporter is irrelevant to slander about physical abuse .

Sittingnut. Publish my previous comment. In it I said why what I say isn't slander. And publish this one as well... What I said was what I'm doing isn't slander because I have eye-witnesses, which are valid evindences in a civilian court... OK. I don't know the names of the AFP reporter and the Daily Mirror reporter. So, since I do not know their names, let's say their cameras weren't confiscated... Now let me make this easier for you to understand, considering the fact that you are Roman Catholic... If I say the god exists, you would ask me what evidence do I have to prove that god exists. I'll tell you that I saw god... Now you can say you doubt me because you didn't see what I saw, and also because I don't trust you... But if you say that god does not exist, I would ask you to prove that god does not exist. Now what should you do? You should produce evidence. Simply because I don't have physical evidence doesn't mean what you'rd saying is right. So Snut, where's the evidence.

- fool even attempts to bring in irrelevant arguments concerning god now that he has lost the argument here,

i will repeat

no evidence for physical abuse of sf.and if the unsubstantiated statement is denigrating to others (as this is ) it is slander .

no need to prove anything else to call it slander.

( no need for compare this to existence of god arguments )

the fool above who repeatedly comments here cannot get his tiny buttbrain to understand this fact it seems.-fool continues to ignore the fact that military has categorically denied any physical abuse .

which means there is conflicting eye witness accounts several inconsistent ones from sf friendly professional liars aka politicians .and consistent denial from military professionals.

fool has ears only for professional liars

- fool still does not clearly admit that afp reporter incident ( even if happened ) , about which fol has not even basic details, has no relevance to claim of physical abuse -

OK. Read this very carefully. This is the last comment I'll make on this thread since I've made my point... Logic is abstract. The you apply to determine whether or not god exists, applies to this as well. You call me fool because you know you can't successfully counter this argument.. If you claim something, you should back it up with facts and evidence. You claimed the allegations are false. You should back it up with evidence. Otherwise I consider you claimed so because you're a government propagandist... If you don't have evidence, you can doubt these allegations. But you can't deny them (The Army can. You can't).... What the Army says isn't eye-witness since they are the accused, or the culprit. Eye-witnesses can only come from a Third Party. If you don't know this you're dumb. There are four eye-witnesses. You can doubt them. But they are eye-witnesses and all four of them say the same thing... I've made my point. I think you're a propagandist.

Oh. I really must say this too even though I said in my last message that it'd be the my last message on this thread... You said Sarath Fonseka supporters incited violence. No matter what you say, the Daily Mirror article contradicts your claim. It was the government thugs who incited violence and the police took their side. What the SF supporters did was reacting to it... They would've reacted that way even if there weren't any allegations of physical abuse, and even if Anoma hadn't wept on tv. What else do you expect them to do when thugs attack them? RUN?.. Yes you may expect them to do that, being the dishonest government propagandist you are... Please have the decency to publish both my last two comments.

as everyone can see above commenter is clearly not in control of his metal facilities . lolhe contradict his own comments even before response is made. lol

-btw as everyone knows i always read carefully ( even crazy in medical sense) comments like above and i always publish comment as soon as i come online.

-above fool is reduced to repeating absurd irrational arguments

what does existence of god has to with facts of this case ? lol

i will repeat the simple facts that fool is unable to get into his tiny buttbrainthere is no independently verifiable evidence of physical abuse.and unsubstantiated statements denigrating others (as this is ) are slander .

no need to prove anything else to call them slander.

-

in another absurdity the madman claims "Eye-witnesses can only come from a Third Party"

1/ not true. anybody can be eyewitness .2/ there is no third party in this case since military and professional politicos/liars were both attached to one or other party .

-

"all four of them say the same thing"another lie

so called eyewitnesses /sf supporting professional liars, give varied and inconsistent accounts of the incident.

inspite of that this commenting fool believes in them religiously, and in contrast he discounts words of military professionals .

i think that attitude indicate who the real propagandist is clearly

- daily mirror article contradicts none of my claims.

to repeat my point earlier -

even if (there is no definitive word on this ), sf supporters were merely reacting to an alleged group of unknown thugs, why did they then chose to damage police vehicles and break other laws ? that does not make sense.

only a fool like above mad commenter will not get the point . if we go by the facts.a violent protest was held by sf supporters and they damaged public and private property and broke laws. that is not acceptable . gov should not tolerate such violence.

only fools like above commenter who seem to live in a fantasy world prefer to find excuses for such inexcusable violence

-my not living in fantasy world like the fool above, and preferring facts and reason does not make me a propagandist. to claim that is yet another absurdity from the crazy ( in medical sense) comments above .

You get paid to crap on.You and Electra have got the hot's for each other, it's so obvious.Did you remove my post? Can't find it. If so WHY?

Do you really care about your country and the people that live there? I think not.

Don't keep supporting Mahinda. If you do, when he falls, and fall he will, you are going to cop it badly.

I think you like Indi, should go into exile. Stop enabling and continuing the murder of people and encouraging hatred towards everyone else unless they are the select few in Mahinda's camp.

Speaking of fools - you can fool some of the people some of the time but not all of the people, all of the time.

Be careful. No matter what said and done, I would hate to hear that one of these guys finally has enough of you and you cop it. Saying things like "it was more UNP than JVP" ... these are the sort of incitefull things that will bite you in the bum!